Pocketbooks - the next D&D evolution, ala "deckbuilding"

[Fiendish Dire Weasel]

You list what D&D RPGs are about now, and assumptions about how they should be played.But times change. Society shifts this way and that on any particular issue. Interest groups spin off into new markets all the time.

RPGs have worked the way they do now pretty much the same for the past 30 years or so. A core book (or set of books) with supplimental books and adventures.

I think your idea falls apart when some questions are asked: Why can't my buddy next to me use my rare book as opposed to his common book? Why would I want to not let him? How is unbalanced characters in an RPG fun? What additional enjoyment would I get from my D&D game when my character is less powerful than everyone else in the group just because they have more disposable income than me?

 

[Driddle]

This discussion brings to mind a game called "Dragonstorm". I believe it was an RPG/CCG. Its success (or lack thereof) could be an indicator of how this idea would work.

Of course, whoever published it wasn't WotC, and it didn't have the "D&D" brand or any of WotC's designers behind it. Those factors could make a difference

One of two people here who have been openminded enough to consider the possibility, regardless of whatever personal feelings might exist to the contrary. (nod) Thank you for that polite consideration.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

One of two people here who have been openminded enough to consider the possibility, regardless of whatever personal feelings might exist to the contrary. (nod) Thank you for that polite consideration.

Please don't confuse disagreement with being close-minded.

Many of us have disagreed with your idea as presented, but have responded with "Convince me". I admit your idea is intriguing. It might even happen some day. But I'm not yet convinced that it would be in my best interests, as a player; that it would be a better alternative to the current system for a game company; or, in short, that it would be successful.

Brandon Tartikoff (used to head programming at ABC during its heyday) once said, "Ideas are a dime a dozen. It's execution that matters." If you want credit for an interesting idea, you got it. If you want to convince us that it's a good, viable, money-making idea, you're not there yet. And if you want to keep trying, I'll be happy to keep listening.

 

[Driddle]

Many of us have disagreed with your idea as presented, but have responded with "Convince me". I admit your idea is intriguing. It might even happen some day. ...

Thank you. That definitely didn't come across before in anyone's general negativity and (to paraphrase) "What A Dumb Idea" comments.

But I'm not yet convinced that it would be in my best interests, as a player; that it would be a better alternative to the current system for a game company; or, in short, that it would be successful.

Brandon Tartikoff (used to head programming at ABC during its heyday) once said, "Ideas are a dime a dozen. It's execution that matters." If you want credit for an interesting idea, you got it. If you want to convince us that it's a good, viable, money-making idea, you're not there yet. And if you want to keep trying, I'll be happy to keep listening.

(shrug) I'm not trying to sell a business plan to anyone. I'm definitely not going to try to convince anyone here that it would be a profitable venture, so please buy into it now now now and give me credit. And obviously any "success" (depending on how you define it) would NOT be generated from the responders to this thread, who have overwhelmingly expressed a belief that "RPG is a Pure Medium Forever and Ever. Amen."

But just because a couple dozen offended RPGamers here would refuse to dump money into such a scheme does not negate the possibility that a market could be built otherwise. I really hate to keep using CCGs as an example, but ... Well, if you had asked ME (and my friends) a few years ago about the long-term viability of M:tg, I would have laughed it off. NO WAY would anyone be willing to pay more than a buck or two for game cards! -- It's a good thing I didn't believe MY common sense was any more valuable than the next guy's, huh?

Eh. I posted my idea, got a few nods and a lot of emotional baloney in response. Not nearly the creative brainstorming give-and-take I'd hoped for, but I'm good with what I got.

... Time to tie off this thread and move on.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Have to chime in here

Thank you. That definitely didn't come across before in anyone's general negativity and (to paraphrase) "What A Dumb Idea" comments.

I don't think it's a dumb idea, in itself. I just would hate if this would be the future of D&D. If they do something like that as a spin-off, I'm fine with it. I might even look into it. But if they do that *instead* of a new edition of the D&D Roleplaying Game, if they turn D&D into the next Pokemon, I'm outa here.

And obviously any "success" (depending on how you define it) would NOT be generated from the responders to this thread, who have overwhelmingly expressed a belief that "RPG is a Pure Medium Forever and Ever. Amen."

Well, RPG is the Pure Medium Forever and Ever - for D&D at least. As soon as it stops being RPG, it stops being D&D, no matter what the labels say. It's like blue jeans: you can make black ones and green ones and brown ones - any color you like. But we're not talking about blue jeans any more.

But just because a couple dozen offended RPGamers here would refuse to dump money into such a scheme does not negate the possibility that a market could be built otherwise.

These offended RPGamers were offended because they are RPGamers. If they were CCGamers or TCGamers, they wouldn't mind.

To sum it up: We're not against a D&D CCG, we are against D&D becoming one. Cause we are Roleplayers.